So the government’s data seeking to refute claims of a collapse in export volumes - recited on here with glee by the fanboi club - turns out to be fake news?
The Cabinet Office run by Michael Gove has been officially reprimanded by the UK Statistics Authority for using unpublished and unverifiable data in an attempt to deny that Brexit had caused a massive fall in volumes of trade through British ports.
We're having some fencing work done...... the barrier sort, not the sword type ...... and one chap who came to give a quote was complaining about the supply problems, due, he said the Brexit.
You mean he’d clocked the EU flag in your window and added 30% to the price “because of Brexit”?
We are currently waiting for 3 different tradesmen to source parts. There are random stock issues with lots of things at the moment which isn’t a problem if you can substitute items, it is a problem if you can’t
I find it hard to believe that anyone who spends much time online shopping won't have noticed problems with Brexit.
We have a weekly order from Asda and have not experienced any shortage problems and every Amazon order has been fulfilled
I am sure there are some supply problems but I have not been inconvenienced by them
Me neither. A few strawberry and raspberry supply issues in January but the supermarkets seem to have sorted them.
Scott XP tritely remarks that it's pure essence of Brexit but I do loads of online shopping and haven't been affected.
Interesting reading the Times over the past few days on the number of big deals heading the UK's way and the unexpected decision of Joe Biden's team to drop the tarrifs. Allied to the immigration tweak by the Home Office and we've started the ball rolling for the UK to be the Singapore of the West.
This country is likely to boom over the next decade. Bet accordingly.
I hope that's true, but I'm not sure I agree. We could do much better, but I don't think we will because:
- we're too addicted to welfare spending, supporting uncompetitive industries like farming or failing regions - huge sections of the economy are monopolies or tight oligopolies - we've masochistically saddled ourselves with ridiculous environmental obligations - our construction industry, which affects so much else throughout the economy, is hobbled by some of the tightest planning regulations in the world
and, perhaps above all,
- we have a government which prioritises short term electoral gain over the sometimes paninful reforms needed to tackle the above.
So we'll probably do alright, but not as well as we could.
Switzerland today goes to the polls to vote on an anti-Muslim constitutional amendment inspired by France’s laws on the burkhathat would ‘prohibit the wearing of face coverings in public.’
Head
Desk
Thump.
Although Contrarian will probably want to emigrate there...
Hopefully Laurence Fox will emigrate there. Somehow I can see him hunting down Muslims in the Swiss Alps, wearing a look of implacable pseudo-aristocratic stupidity.
Well, that seems a bit harsh on the Swiss, but I was more thinking that would outlaw face masks...
Fox is a ghastly guy. He will be eviscerated but will be too thick skinned (or ACT too thick skinned) to care.
The Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph are repositories of moaners, a British pastime. I was at a vaccination centre the other day and some lady was moaning away loudly in front of everyone about having to wait 15 minutes after she'd received her jab.
Some years ago I had a cataract operation. There were four or five of us in the waiting room, and after the operation we had to wait for a while; clerical and transport issues. After being 'done' most of us commented on how well we could now see, except one lady who moaned about the dreadful pain, and how she couldn't imaging during that again.
Is it normal for a Committee of this nature to be quite so selective about the evidence they publish?
Genuine question - I had always assumed that they were very partisan in the report but not necessary in the selection of the facts they disclose
If they do not publish it then they cannot use it in their report. Hence why Sturgeon has been so confident, anything incriminating has not been published.
Can there not be a minority report that says the main report is an SNP-engineered cover-up?
Given what we have seen and heard , anything other than it being critical will be for sure a whitewash. Of more interest will be James Hamilton QC inquiry, he is not limited by scope or SNP majority. Interesting to see his opinion.
Yes, Hamilton is more likely to be the report that she cannot run from.
All the more so if it is the polar opposite of the Holyrood whitewash. It will bring into sharp relief just how much the Scottish Government has become a fawning tool to preserve the position of the First Minister.
Whoever does replace her is going to need to do quite the spring clean.
My dog has more chance of being Mayor of London than Laurence Fox. Presumably Fox, despite his ignorance, knows this. He'll be standing hoping to make money from it, given his acting/'singing' careers have dried up.
The poll shows some support for ending lockdown soon, and large support for ending it by the end of May. Well, I'd like lockdown to end today. We all would. But I don't think it should. I don't think such polling distinguishes enough between what people would like to happen and what people think should happen.
Fox is a ghastly guy. He will be eviscerated but will be too thick skinned (or ACT too thick skinned) to care.
The Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph are repositories of moaners, a British pastime. I was at a vaccination centre the other day and some lady was moaning away loudly in front of everyone about having to wait 15 minutes after she'd received her jab.
Some years ago I had a cataract operation. There were four or five of us in the waiting room, and after the operation we had to wait for a while; clerical and transport issues. After being 'done' most of us commented on how well we could now see, except one lady who moaned about the dreadful pain, and how she couldn't imaging during that again.
I was always pretty pro monarchy without ever really thinking about it. But it’s a bit like Father Christmas. One day you wake up and just realise that you don’t believe any more. Life remains more fun when you go along with the Father Christmas charade and all its silliness. And that’s pretty much what we do as a nation with the royals.
There’s no point to them but in the list of constitutional aberrations to debate and amend, they’re well below EU membership, the purpose and makeup of the House of Lords, the bodge job of the Supreme Court implementation, regional devolution, and of course the very union itself. And outside about half of Scots and the small band of Lib Dems, no one can be arsed with any of that stuff either.
Doesn’t mean the royals should get complacent mind. Unlike the rest, there’s an easy answer to “what do we replace them with?”. Nothing. I’d stretch to a Lords clerk to literally rubber stamp acts of Parliament in place of royal assent but we must have plenty of them already.
Will it happen? I doubt it. Do I care? Not one way or the other. One does hear shall we say, unflattering rumours about the direct male heirs from time to time, so it can’t be entirely ruled out I suppose.
The way law and legal change works in the modern world means that it would require a revolution. It takes reams of legal nonsense to make quite simple admin changes now, and examples abound in Statutory Instruments every day. Abolition of the monarchy would tie up government, parliament and admin for 10 years, ending with at least one new party, probably more (Lozza v Farage for PM anyone?) committed to the reintroduction of the monarchy.
No foreseeable government is going to touch an issue which is at one massively complex, long term, 10 times more divisive than Brexit and the GFA combined, is electoral suicide with no dividend in the popular mind. Notice that even Jezza killed the issue dead immediately and rapidly when he was asked. Salmond and Sturgeon won't touch it. No-one will.
Parliament can, has and would legislate for change within the system - abolition of male priority for example. That is fairly simple. Abolition is a nightmare.
Constitutional inertia. The British monarchy will most likely survive until our first probe to Alpha Centauri B confirms the existence of the lizard people and the tight uncomfortable human costumes can then be finally slipped off at the Palace.
My dog has more chance of being Mayor of London than Laurence Fox. Presumably Fox, despite his ignorance, knows this. He'll be standing hoping to make money from it, given his acting/'singing' careers have dried up.
The poll shows some support for ending lockdown soon, and large support for ending it by the end of May. Well, I'd like lockdown to end today. We all would. But I don't think it should. I don't think such polling distinguishes enough between what people would like to happen and what people think should happen.
Have you considered putting your dog forward? A candidate who merely barks rather than is completely barking would make a refreshing change.
Edit - remember, next week cases are going to spike dramatically if LFTs are any use at all (which they may not be). So that may have an effect on public opinion.
That is why our smarter posters (not me, as I haven’t really commented) have rightly been warning she would stay focussed on hospitalisations and deaths as the metric.
But the Mail, the Beeb and the rest of the gutter press won’t, of course.
So the government’s data seeking to refute claims of a collapse in export volumes - recited on here with glee by the fanboi club - turns out to be fake news?
The Cabinet Office run by Michael Gove has been officially reprimanded by the UK Statistics Authority for using unpublished and unverifiable data in an attempt to deny that Brexit had caused a massive fall in volumes of trade through British ports.
We're having some fencing work done...... the barrier sort, not the sword type ...... and one chap who came to give a quote was complaining about the supply problems, due, he said the Brexit.
Interesting, we had our fence done in January. No problems whatsoever.
Apparently, round here anyway, people who make and mend fences are very busy. House owners have been at home looking at their gardens, and haven't spent their money on holidays.
So the supply problems are made worse by an increase in demand.
Fox is a ghastly guy. He will be eviscerated but will be too thick skinned (or ACT too thick skinned) to care.
The Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph are repositories of moaners, a British pastime. I was at a vaccination centre the other day and some lady was moaning away loudly in front of everyone about having to wait 15 minutes after she'd received her jab.
Unless she was waving a copy of the Mail or Telegraph, I don't see the relevance.
My dog has more chance of being Mayor of London than Laurence Fox. Presumably Fox, despite his ignorance, knows this. He'll be standing hoping to make money from it, given his acting/'singing' careers have dried up.
The poll shows some support for ending lockdown soon, and large support for ending it by the end of May. Well, I'd like lockdown to end today. We all would. But I don't think it should. I don't think such polling distinguishes enough between what people would like to happen and what people think should happen.
Not sure about voting for your dog vis a vis Laurence Fox, TBH.
One the second point, though, you are right. There's a distinct difference between wanting something to happen and thinking it's desirable now. In a out-patients waiting area yesterday, and while the tree or four elderly gentlemen there all wanting to get back to normal, that was ASA safely P, not immediately. We all know people who had had Covid, some fatally.
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Morning Malc, hope those turnips are all ready to throw at the Sturgeonites.
Morning ydoether, reading Macbeth at present.
What’s been done’s inane.
But I don’t quite see Robertson as a Caesar. Even if you think he is duff.
Once upon a time I thought he was next FM, and he is trying hard with his wife's and Sturgeon's help to get there.
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Morning Malc, hope those turnips are all ready to throw at the Sturgeonites.
Morning ydoether, reading Macbeth at present.
What’s been done’s inane.
But I don’t quite see Robertson as a Caesar. Even if you think he is duff.
Once upon a time I thought he was next FM, and he is trying hard with his wife's and Sturgeon's help to get there.
My three awesome puns on Macbeth clearly failed to burn ‘em.
My dog has more chance of being Mayor of London than Laurence Fox. Presumably Fox, despite his ignorance, knows this. He'll be standing hoping to make money from it, given his acting/'singing' careers have dried up.
The poll shows some support for ending lockdown soon, and large support for ending it by the end of May. Well, I'd like lockdown to end today. We all would. But I don't think it should. I don't think such polling distinguishes enough between what people would like to happen and what people think should happen.
Actually I don't want lockdown ended at the moment because I would much prefer people to still have a choice of not going into the office unless they want to.
Switzerland today goes to the polls to vote on an anti-Muslim constitutional amendment inspired by France’s laws on the burkhathat would ‘prohibit the wearing of face coverings in public.’
Head
Desk
Thump.
Although Contrarian will probably want to emigrate there...
I think there is a lot of carefully planned irony in the timing.
I'm sure the minimum wage earning cashier will be heartbroken at the nurse earning much more than they earn getting a less than expected pay rise.
Especially in a year that many of the cashiers customers far from getting a pay rise have had substantial pay cuts or lost their job altogether.
What a laugh that is!
Trust you to be against nurses keeping pace with inflation!
The problem is that there are a lot of people who have worked throughout Covid and aren't getting a payrise (both public and private sector)
And a lot of people who no longer have a job.
Now you aren't going to win in a budget as people will always complain but a 1% payrise allows everyone to complain.
What should have been offered is either a 1 off thank you bonus or weeks additional holiday.
Alternatively they could have abolished the Department of Health, sacked all its staff and that would at least have cheered up every NHS frontline worker.
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Morning Malc, hope those turnips are all ready to throw at the Sturgeonites.
Morning ydoether, reading Macbeth at present.
What’s been done’s inane.
But I don’t quite see Robertson as a Caesar. Even if you think he is duff.
So the government’s data seeking to refute claims of a collapse in export volumes - recited on here with glee by the fanboi club - turns out to be fake news?
The Cabinet Office run by Michael Gove has been officially reprimanded by the UK Statistics Authority for using unpublished and unverifiable data in an attempt to deny that Brexit had caused a massive fall in volumes of trade through British ports.
We're having some fencing work done...... the barrier sort, not the sword type ...... and one chap who came to give a quote was complaining about the supply problems, due, he said the Brexit.
You mean he’d clocked the EU flag in your window and added 30% to the price “because of Brexit”?
We are currently waiting for 3 different tradesmen to source parts. There are random stock issues with lots of things at the moment which isn’t a problem if you can substitute items, it is a problem if you can’t
I find it hard to believe that anyone who spends much time online shopping won't have noticed problems with Brexit.
We have a weekly order from Asda and have not experienced any shortage problems and every Amazon order has been fulfilled
I am sure there are some supply problems but I have not been inconvenienced by them
Well that's alright then!
And I do not know anyone who has
Brie can be a problem. We have to make do with Perl Wen in these parts.
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Morning Malc, hope those turnips are all ready to throw at the Sturgeonites.
Morning ydoether, reading Macbeth at present.
What’s been done’s inane.
But I don’t quite see Robertson as a Caesar. Even if you think he is duff.
Robertson? Not a ghost of a chance.
I don’t know. Witches worse, him or one of the current nonentities in the executive? They’re all a bit drab...
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
Fox is a ghastly guy. He will be eviscerated but will be too thick skinned (or ACT too thick skinned) to care.
The Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph are repositories of moaners, a British pastime. I was at a vaccination centre the other day and some lady was moaning away loudly in front of everyone about having to wait 15 minutes after she'd received her jab.
Some years ago I had a cataract operation. There were four or five of us in the waiting room, and after the operation we had to wait for a while; clerical and transport issues. After being 'done' most of us commented on how well we could now see, except one lady who moaned about the dreadful pain, and how she couldn't imaging during that again.
LOL. Proof reading interrupted again! 'imagine' of course.
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Morning Malc, hope those turnips are all ready to throw at the Sturgeonites.
Morning ydoether, reading Macbeth at present.
What’s been done’s inane.
But I don’t quite see Robertson as a Caesar. Even if you think he is duff.
Robertson? Not a ghost of a chance.
I don’t know. Witches worse, him or one of the current nonentities in the executive? They’re all a bit drab...
Won't he need another two, to help? Or am I being literal over 'spelling'?
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Morning Malc, hope those turnips are all ready to throw at the Sturgeonites.
Morning ydoether, reading Macbeth at present.
What’s been done’s inane.
But I don’t quite see Robertson as a Caesar. Even if you think he is duff.
Robertson? Not a ghost of a chance.
I don’t know. Witches worse, him or one of the current nonentities in the executive? They’re all a bit drab...
When are you going to stop the Macbeth references? Tomorrow or tomorrow or tomorrow?
Fox is a ghastly guy. He will be eviscerated but will be too thick skinned (or ACT too thick skinned) to care.
The Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph are repositories of moaners, a British pastime. I was at a vaccination centre the other day and some lady was moaning away loudly in front of everyone about having to wait 15 minutes after she'd received her jab.
Some years ago I had a cataract operation. There were four or five of us in the waiting room, and after the operation we had to wait for a while; clerical and transport issues. After being 'done' most of us commented on how well we could now see, except one lady who moaned about the dreadful pain, and how she couldn't imaging during that again.
LOL. Proof reading interrupted again! 'imagine' of course.
I was just enjoying the idea of somebody not imaging an operation on their sight.
So the government’s data seeking to refute claims of a collapse in export volumes - recited on here with glee by the fanboi club - turns out to be fake news?
The Cabinet Office run by Michael Gove has been officially reprimanded by the UK Statistics Authority for using unpublished and unverifiable data in an attempt to deny that Brexit had caused a massive fall in volumes of trade through British ports.
We're having some fencing work done...... the barrier sort, not the sword type ...... and one chap who came to give a quote was complaining about the supply problems, due, he said the Brexit.
You mean he’d clocked the EU flag in your window and added 30% to the price “because of Brexit”?
We are currently waiting for 3 different tradesmen to source parts. There are random stock issues with lots of things at the moment which isn’t a problem if you can substitute items, it is a problem if you can’t
I find it hard to believe that anyone who spends much time online shopping won't have noticed problems with Brexit.
We have a weekly order from Asda and have not experienced any shortage problems and every Amazon order has been fulfilled
I am sure there are some supply problems but I have not been inconvenienced by them
Me neither. A few strawberry and raspberry supply issues in January but the supermarkets seem to have sorted them.
Scott XP tritely remarks that it's pure essence of Brexit but I do loads of online shopping and haven't been affected.
Interesting reading the Times over the past few days on the number of big deals heading the UK's way and the unexpected decision of Joe Biden's team to drop the tarrifs. Allied to the immigration tweak by the Home Office and we've started the ball rolling for the UK to be the Singapore of the West.
This country is likely to boom over the next decade. Bet accordingly.
I received a MS type cover from the UK to Spain in 5 days - zero problems.
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Morning Malc, hope those turnips are all ready to throw at the Sturgeonites.
Morning ydoether, reading Macbeth at present.
What’s been done’s inane.
But I don’t quite see Robertson as a Caesar. Even if you think he is duff.
Robertson? Not a ghost of a chance.
I don’t know. Witches worse, him or one of the current nonentities in the executive? They’re all a bit drab...
Won't he need another two, to help? Or am I being literal over 'spelling'?
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Morning Malc, hope those turnips are all ready to throw at the Sturgeonites.
Morning ydoether, reading Macbeth at present.
What’s been done’s inane.
But I don’t quite see Robertson as a Caesar. Even if you think he is duff.
Robertson? Not a ghost of a chance.
I don’t know. Witches worse, him or one of the current nonentities in the executive? They’re all a bit drab...
When are you going to stop the Macbeth references? Tomorrow or tomorrow or tomorrow?
Fox is a ghastly guy. He will be eviscerated but will be too thick skinned (or ACT too thick skinned) to care.
The Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph are repositories of moaners, a British pastime. I was at a vaccination centre the other day and some lady was moaning away loudly in front of everyone about having to wait 15 minutes after she'd received her jab.
Some years ago I had a cataract operation. There were four or five of us in the waiting room, and after the operation we had to wait for a while; clerical and transport issues. After being 'done' most of us commented on how well we could now see, except one lady who moaned about the dreadful pain, and how she couldn't imaging during that again.
LOL. Proof reading interrupted again! 'imagine' of course.
I was just enjoying the idea of somebody not imaging an operation on their sight.
More to the point I’m not sure anyone needs cataract surgery more than twice (once in each eye) given how it is done.
Mr. Jonathan, slightly inaccurate, as defections and electoral victories (albeit EU rather than Westminster) were what prompted the referendum promise, possibly coupled with the probability (that did not occur) of it being something to jettison to please the Lib Dems in Coalition 2.
I think is fair to say no Nige no Brexit, despite him not getting a whiff of direct political power. He presents a textbook to other would be egotistical nutcases out there. You just need to get 5-10 percent in the right places and keep gobbing off about moonshine on the telly.
It helps if your brand of proto-fascist fuckwittery has some elements that are good for billionaires.
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
Golly. How thick are you? Bye bye Union.
Regardless of whether or not he thinks the Union is any use, he might as well do as he sees fit. Unionist tactical voting is pointless, because the absolute floor of support for the SNP is now 45%, or somewhere very close to it (some of that will bleed away to the Greens on the list vote in May, but only because they are also very pro-independence and can be relied upon never in a million years to prop up the Tories.)
Scotland will elect an endless series of Nationalist Governments until independence occurs. The direction of travel is set. It's just a matter of how long it takes to get there.
So the government’s data seeking to refute claims of a collapse in export volumes - recited on here with glee by the fanboi club - turns out to be fake news?
The Cabinet Office run by Michael Gove has been officially reprimanded by the UK Statistics Authority for using unpublished and unverifiable data in an attempt to deny that Brexit had caused a massive fall in volumes of trade through British ports.
We're having some fencing work done...... the barrier sort, not the sword type ...... and one chap who came to give a quote was complaining about the supply problems, due, he said the Brexit.
You mean he’d clocked the EU flag in your window and added 30% to the price “because of Brexit”?
We are currently waiting for 3 different tradesmen to source parts. There are random stock issues with lots of things at the moment which isn’t a problem if you can substitute items, it is a problem if you can’t
I find it hard to believe that anyone who spends much time online shopping won't have noticed problems with Brexit.
We have a weekly order from Asda and have not experienced any shortage problems and every Amazon order has been fulfilled
I am sure there are some supply problems but I have not been inconvenienced by them
Well that's alright then!
And I do not know anyone who has
Brie can be a problem. We have to make do with Perl Wen in these parts.
Seriously? 'No Good Brie'
That's made my day!
No, stereotyping myself as a Guardianista Liberal. Now when imports of the Guardian fail to arrive on the news stands, I will be angry!
Fox is a ghastly guy. He will be eviscerated but will be too thick skinned (or ACT too thick skinned) to care.
The Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph are repositories of moaners, a British pastime. I was at a vaccination centre the other day and some lady was moaning away loudly in front of everyone about having to wait 15 minutes after she'd received her jab.
Some years ago I had a cataract operation. There were four or five of us in the waiting room, and after the operation we had to wait for a while; clerical and transport issues. After being 'done' most of us commented on how well we could now see, except one lady who moaned about the dreadful pain, and how she couldn't imaging during that again.
LOL. Proof reading interrupted again! 'imagine' of course.
I was just enjoying the idea of somebody not imaging an operation on their sight.
More to the point I’m not sure anyone needs cataract surgery more than twice (once in each eye) given how it is done.
Glad I'm contributing to the gaiety of nations, even if it's only a couple of them!
One doesn't, of course need more than one cataract operation per eye, AFAIK, but this woman, having had one on her right eye was, apparently, going to need one on her left in the not-too-distant. If I do get a problem in my right eye, the improvement in my left, the one I had done, would ensure I was back to the operating theatre PDQ!
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Morning Malc, hope those turnips are all ready to throw at the Sturgeonites.
Morning ydoether, reading Macbeth at present.
What’s been done’s inane.
But I don’t quite see Robertson as a Caesar. Even if you think he is duff.
Robertson? Not a ghost of a chance.
I don’t know. Witches worse, him or one of the current nonentities in the executive? They’re all a bit drab...
When are you going to stop the Macbeth references? Tomorrow or tomorrow or tomorrow?
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Can’t imagine Laurence Fox will do all that well, might even be the one time where saying you’re going to lay a bet without knowing the price is not worthy of detention or lines. Would I back him at 1000? Don’t think so
Farage would do better, I am surprised he’s not had a go
I was always pretty pro monarchy without ever really thinking about it. But it’s a bit like Father Christmas. One day you wake up and just realise that you don’t believe any more. Life remains more fun when you go along with the Father Christmas charade and all its silliness. And that’s pretty much what we do as a nation with the royals.
There’s no point to them but in the list of constitutional aberrations to debate and amend, they’re well below EU membership, the purpose and makeup of the House of Lords, the bodge job of the Supreme Court implementation, regional devolution, and of course the very union itself. And outside about half of Scots and the small band of Lib Dems, no one can be arsed with any of that stuff either.
Doesn’t mean the royals should get complacent mind. Unlike the rest, there’s an easy answer to “what do we replace them with?”. Nothing. I’d stretch to a Lords clerk to literally rubber stamp acts of Parliament in place of royal assent but we must have plenty of them already.
Will it happen? I doubt it. Do I care? Not one way or the other. One does hear shall we say, unflattering rumours about the direct male heirs from time to time, so it can’t be entirely ruled out I suppose.
The way law and legal change works in the modern world means that it would require a revolution. It takes reams of legal nonsense to make quite simple admin changes now, and examples abound in Statutory Instruments every day. Abolition of the monarchy would tie up government, parliament and admin for 10 years, ending with at least one new party, probably more (Lozza v Farage for PM anyone?) committed to the reintroduction of the monarchy.
No foreseeable government is going to touch an issue which is at one massively complex, long term, 10 times more divisive than Brexit and the GFA combined, is electoral suicide with no dividend in the popular mind. Notice that even Jezza killed the issue dead immediately and rapidly when he was asked. Salmond and Sturgeon won't touch it. No-one will.
Parliament can, has and would legislate for change within the system - abolition of male priority for example. That is fairly simple. Abolition is a nightmare.
Presumably why some places very keen on doing it have taken their sweet time.
You just legislate to change the name of the post, alter rules of succession to be by election and open to all. Done.
This country is likely to boom over the next decade. Bet accordingly.
You this country, mean Little England?
BoZo is fuelling Irish reunification, Scottish independence, and even the Welsh are stirring
Missed yesterday's polls?
Early days, cant speak to a trend yet. But we can hope.
In Scotland it does look as if it can only get worse for Sturgeon with many unanswered questions following her at every press conference, Parliamentary debate, and of course the Holyrood election campaign starting shortly
Malc has been entirely vindicated on here and it does demonstrate yet again a week is a long time in politics
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
Golly. How thick are you? Bye bye Union.
Regardless of whether or not he thinks the Union is any use, he might as well do as he sees fit. Unionist tactical voting is pointless, because the absolute floor of support for the SNP is now 45%, or somewhere very close to it (some of that will bleed away to the Greens on the list vote in May, but only because they are also very pro-independence and can be relied upon never in a million years to prop up the Tories.)
Scotland will elect an endless series of Nationalist Governments until independence occurs. The direction of travel is set. It's just a matter of how long it takes to get there.
Maybe, maybe not.
Maybe a unionist party will emerge that Hoover's up the unionists votes. The BQ lost its way in Quebec.
The best way for that to happen would be for unionism to win a second referendum, like they did in Quebec, which puts the issue to bed in the voters minds.
But it seems some people are petrified of democracy. In which case they deserve to lose.
So the government’s data seeking to refute claims of a collapse in export volumes - recited on here with glee by the fanboi club - turns out to be fake news?
The Cabinet Office run by Michael Gove has been officially reprimanded by the UK Statistics Authority for using unpublished and unverifiable data in an attempt to deny that Brexit had caused a massive fall in volumes of trade through British ports.
We're having some fencing work done...... the barrier sort, not the sword type ...... and one chap who came to give a quote was complaining about the supply problems, due, he said the Brexit.
You mean he’d clocked the EU flag in your window and added 30% to the price “because of Brexit”?
We are currently waiting for 3 different tradesmen to source parts. There are random stock issues with lots of things at the moment which isn’t a problem if you can substitute items, it is a problem if you can’t
I find it hard to believe that anyone who spends much time online shopping won't have noticed problems with Brexit.
We have a weekly order from Asda and have not experienced any shortage problems and every Amazon order has been fulfilled
I am sure there are some supply problems but I have not been inconvenienced by them
Well that's alright then!
And I do not know anyone who has
Brie can be a problem. We have to make do with Perl Wen in these parts.
Seriously? 'No Good Brie'
That's made my day!
No, stereotyping myself as a Guardianista Liberal. Now when imports of the Guardian fail to arrive on the news stands, I will be angry!
I wonder what the environmental cost of an actual copy of the Guardian is, particularly when compared to reading the electronic version? Not any easy calculation I expect, particularly when comparing the different devices that could be used and how much of the cost of manufacturing the device needs to be ascribed to The Guardian rather than, say, pb.com.
I was always pretty pro monarchy without ever really thinking about it. But it’s a bit like Father Christmas. One day you wake up and just realise that you don’t believe any more. Life remains more fun when you go along with the Father Christmas charade and all its silliness. And that’s pretty much what we do as a nation with the royals.
There’s no point to them but in the list of constitutional aberrations to debate and amend, they’re well below EU membership, the purpose and makeup of the House of Lords, the bodge job of the Supreme Court implementation, regional devolution, and of course the very union itself. And outside about half of Scots and the small band of Lib Dems, no one can be arsed with any of that stuff either.
Doesn’t mean the royals should get complacent mind. Unlike the rest, there’s an easy answer to “what do we replace them with?”. Nothing. I’d stretch to a Lords clerk to literally rubber stamp acts of Parliament in place of royal assent but we must have plenty of them already.
Will it happen? I doubt it. Do I care? Not one way or the other. One does hear shall we say, unflattering rumours about the direct male heirs from time to time, so it can’t be entirely ruled out I suppose.
The way law and legal change works in the modern world means that it would require a revolution. It takes reams of legal nonsense to make quite simple admin changes now, and examples abound in Statutory Instruments every day. Abolition of the monarchy would tie up government, parliament and admin for 10 years, ending with at least one new party, probably more (Lozza v Farage for PM anyone?) committed to the reintroduction of the monarchy.
No foreseeable government is going to touch an issue which is at one massively complex, long term, 10 times more divisive than Brexit and the GFA combined, is electoral suicide with no dividend in the popular mind. Notice that even Jezza killed the issue dead immediately and rapidly when he was asked. Salmond and Sturgeon won't touch it. No-one will.
Parliament can, has and would legislate for change within the system - abolition of male priority for example. That is fairly simple. Abolition is a nightmare.
Presumably why some places very keen on doing it have taken their sweet time.
You just legislate to change the name of the post, alter rules of succession to be by election and open to all. Done.
Good luck. Galloway v Farage v Lozza v Meghan v that bloke off the telly awaits.
If Fox got 25% of the vote that would be the highest share for a third party candidate in a London Mayoral election and could even get him to the runoff, though Khan would still likely win.
Otherwise some voters will vote Fox in round 1 then for Bailey in the runoff.
If Fox stands for the Assembly he could get in on the list, especially in somewhere like Bexley and Bromley or Havering and Redbridge
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
Golly. How thick are you? Bye bye Union.
Regardless of whether or not he thinks the Union is any use, he might as well do as he sees fit. Unionist tactical voting is pointless, because the absolute floor of support for the SNP is now 45%, or somewhere very close to it (some of that will bleed away to the Greens on the list vote in May, but only because they are also very pro-independence and can be relied upon never in a million years to prop up the Tories.)
Scotland will elect an endless series of Nationalist Governments until independence occurs. The direction of travel is set. It's just a matter of how long it takes to get there.
That's just dumb. I think they'll go indy but views are not set forever like laws of nature, the floor of SNP support is not guaranteed to be that level forever.
40 years ago you'd claim on the same logic that the level of SNP support meant independence was impossible and they should give up Well what do you know, things changed!
I dont think it will, and I think a vote will come too soon for a change, but the idea they will always vote X is ridiculous.
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
Golly. How thick are you? Bye bye Union.
Regardless of whether or not he thinks the Union is any use, he might as well do as he sees fit. Unionist tactical voting is pointless, because the absolute floor of support for the SNP is now 45%, or somewhere very close to it (some of that will bleed away to the Greens on the list vote in May, but only because they are also very pro-independence and can be relied upon never in a million years to prop up the Tories.)
Scotland will elect an endless series of Nationalist Governments until independence occurs. The direction of travel is set. It's just a matter of how long it takes to get there.
You keep repeating this but it is not at all certain that Scotland will become independent
Indeed, as I have maintained for a long time the SNP would love another referendum if it was called
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Morning Malc, hope those turnips are all ready to throw at the Sturgeonites.
Morning ydoether, reading Macbeth at present.
What’s been done’s inane.
But I don’t quite see Robertson as a Caesar. Even if you think he is duff.
Robertson? Not a ghost of a chance.
I don’t know. Witches worse, him or one of the current nonentities in the executive? They’re all a bit drab...
When are you going to stop the Macbeth references? Tomorrow or tomorrow or tomorrow?
When in a hole, ydoether....
"Is this a digger I see before me?"
I think we’re done, can we move on?!
If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly.
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
Golly. How thick are you? Bye bye Union.
Regardless of whether or not he thinks the Union is any use, he might as well do as he sees fit. Unionist tactical voting is pointless, because the absolute floor of support for the SNP is now 45%, or somewhere very close to it (some of that will bleed away to the Greens on the list vote in May, but only because they are also very pro-independence and can be relied upon never in a million years to prop up the Tories.)
Scotland will elect an endless series of Nationalist Governments until independence occurs. The direction of travel is set. It's just a matter of how long it takes to get there.
You keep repeating this but it is not at all certain that Scotland will become independent
Indeed, as I have maintained for a long time the SNP would love another referendum if it was called
If Fox got 25% of the vote that would be the highest share for a third party candidate in a London Mayoral election and could even get him to the runoff, though Khan would still likely win.
Otherwise some voters will vote Fox in round 1 then for Bailey in the runoff.
If Fox stands for the Assembly he could get in on the list, especially in somewhere like Bexley and Bromley or Havering and Redbridge
As always HYUFD, a thoughtful analysis. I still have my shirt on Khan.
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
Golly. How thick are you? Bye bye Union.
Regardless of whether or not he thinks the Union is any use, he might as well do as he sees fit. Unionist tactical voting is pointless, because the absolute floor of support for the SNP is now 45%, or somewhere very close to it (some of that will bleed away to the Greens on the list vote in May, but only because they are also very pro-independence and can be relied upon never in a million years to prop up the Tories.)
Scotland will elect an endless series of Nationalist Governments until independence occurs. The direction of travel is set. It's just a matter of how long it takes to get there.
You keep repeating this but it is not at all certain that Scotland will become independent
Indeed, as I have maintained for a long time the SNP would love another referendum if it was called
I don’t think many would argue with that, or did autocorrect change lose to love?
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
Golly. How thick are you? Bye bye Union.
Regardless of whether or not he thinks the Union is any use, he might as well do as he sees fit. Unionist tactical voting is pointless, because the absolute floor of support for the SNP is now 45%, or somewhere very close to it (some of that will bleed away to the Greens on the list vote in May, but only because they are also very pro-independence and can be relied upon never in a million years to prop up the Tories.)
Scotland will elect an endless series of Nationalist Governments until independence occurs. The direction of travel is set. It's just a matter of how long it takes to get there.
You keep repeating this but it is not at all certain that Scotland will become independent
Indeed, as I have maintained for a long time the SNP would love another referendum if it was called
New Panelbase poll has further bad news for Sturgeon with the SNP down 5% on the Scottish Parliament constituency vote and down 4% on the list vote and virtually unchanged on the 46.5% and 41% it got in 2016. Both the Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Labour are up 3% each and the Greens are also down.
If true that means the SNP risks no majority at all in May
Khan is going to win, there is no doubt about that.
That's why no serious Tory is even running and they're running Bailey instead. Because they don't have a proper candidate like Boris as they all know they'd be humiliated.
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
Golly. How thick are you? Bye bye Union.
Regardless of whether or not he thinks the Union is any use, he might as well do as he sees fit. Unionist tactical voting is pointless, because the absolute floor of support for the SNP is now 45%, or somewhere very close to it (some of that will bleed away to the Greens on the list vote in May, but only because they are also very pro-independence and can be relied upon never in a million years to prop up the Tories.)
Scotland will elect an endless series of Nationalist Governments until independence occurs. The direction of travel is set. It's just a matter of how long it takes to get there.
You keep repeating this but it is not at all certain that Scotland will become independent
Indeed, as I have maintained for a long time the SNP would love another referendum if it was called
I don’t think many would argue with that, or did autocorrect change lose to love?
If Fox got 25% of the vote that would be the highest share for a third party candidate in a London Mayoral election and could even get him to the runoff, though Khan would still likely win.
Otherwise some voters will vote Fox in round 1 then for Bailey in the runoff.
If Fox stands for the Assembly he could get in on the list, especially in somewhere like Bexley and Bromley or Havering and Redbridge
Ummm, a third party candidate once won 39% of the vote in a London mayoral election and actually won the election.
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
People will do as they wish and prioritise as they wish of course, but theres really no getting away from that if one supports the union then at some level there will be cooperation and support with other unionist parties, even ones wrong on almost every other policy. Same applies to indy parties in places like Catalonia.
When voting locally, nationally (Scotland or UK) people just might not be able to vote tactically, as is their right, but at some point if a unionist really is a unionist they will be standing shoulder to shoulder with a hated opponent even with no positive action on their part.
Fox is just the latest no-hoper to jump in, and I continue to be saddened that people on Betfair won't back them even to 100 or so. Literally unlayable on the platform.
New Panelbase poll has further bad news for Sturgeon with the SNP down 5% on the Scottish Parliament constituency vote and down 4% on the list vote and virtually unchanged on the 46.5% and 41% it got in 2016. Both the Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Labour are up 3% each and the Greens are also down.
If true that means the SNP risks no majority at all in May
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
Golly. How thick are you? Bye bye Union.
Regardless of whether or not he thinks the Union is any use, he might as well do as he sees fit. Unionist tactical voting is pointless, because the absolute floor of support for the SNP is now 45%, or somewhere very close to it (some of that will bleed away to the Greens on the list vote in May, but only because they are also very pro-independence and can be relied upon never in a million years to prop up the Tories.)
Scotland will elect an endless series of Nationalist Governments until independence occurs. The direction of travel is set. It's just a matter of how long it takes to get there.
Maybe, maybe not.
Maybe a unionist party will emerge that Hoover's up the unionists votes. The BQ lost its way in Quebec.
The best way for that to happen would be for unionism to win a second referendum, like they did in Quebec, which puts the issue to bed in the voters minds.
But it seems some people are petrified of democracy. In which case they deserve to lose.
Quebec's second referendum was 15 years after the first, not 7 ie a genuine generation
But.....apparently these figures are not weighted by voter turnout (why?) and will be updated later this week....
Can I just clarify, the Panelbase poll in the Sunday Times does use voter turnout which is consistent with its previous poll it is the ComRes poll that has dropped weighting voter turnout so isn't consistent with its previous poll.
Older readers may remember we used to call ComRes comedy results.
Fox is a ghastly guy. He will be eviscerated but will be too thick skinned (or ACT too thick skinned) to care.
The Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph are repositories of moaners, a British pastime. I was at a vaccination centre the other day and some lady was moaning away loudly in front of everyone about having to wait 15 minutes after she'd received her jab.
Some years ago I had a cataract operation. There were four or five of us in the waiting room, and after the operation we had to wait for a while; clerical and transport issues. After being 'done' most of us commented on how well we could now see, except one lady who moaned about the dreadful pain, and how she couldn't imaging during that again.
LOL. Proof reading interrupted again! 'imagine' of course.
I was just enjoying the idea of somebody not imaging an operation on their sight.
More to the point I’m not sure anyone needs cataract surgery more than twice (once in each eye) given how it is done.
Glad I'm contributing to the gaiety of nations, even if it's only a couple of them!
One doesn't, of course need more than one cataract operation per eye, AFAIK, but this woman, having had one on her right eye was, apparently, going to need one on her left in the not-too-distant. If I do get a problem in my right eye, the improvement in my left, the one I had done, would ensure I was back to the operating theatre PDQ!
To be fair even routine surgery has a complication rate. She may not be a whinger so much as the one who got the short straw.
Khan is going to win, there is no doubt about that.
That's why no serious Tory is even running and they're running Bailey instead. Because they don't have a proper candidate like Boris as they all know they'd be humiliated.
I have long thought @Philip_Thompson was a Russian propoganda machine operated by several Kremlin aparatchiks. We have the comedian of the bunch posting this morning. "Because they don't have a proper candidate like Boris as they all know they'd be humiliated". That's a cracker!
This country is likely to boom over the next decade. Bet accordingly.
You this country, mean Little England?
BoZo is fuelling Irish reunification, Scottish independence, and even the Welsh are stirring
Missed yesterday's polls?
Early days, cant speak to a trend yet. But we can hope.
Have a look at Andrew Rawnsley in todays Guardian 'Why Boris Johnson, the greased piglet, is eluding the grasp of Keir Starmer.'
Interesting as always from Rawnsley but he is completely blind to a central fact in trying to account for Boris 'getting away with it'.
In politics all things are relative. Nothing is absolute. There are only two horses in the competition, especially in England, which is where Tories win elections. There is no conviction whatsoever that Labour is either more competent, would have done it better, or are a suitable government for post Covid or post Brexit. Tories are ahead (You Gov) in every socio economic group, and doing even better with C2DE than with ABC1- which is a huge culture shift.
Boris is a genius and wins things. Labour has not yet found one to match. Against some absolute standard the Tories are of course awful, it makes no difference. It's only Labour they need to beat.
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
People will do as they wish and prioritise as they wish of course, but theres really no getting away from that if one supports the union then at some level there will be cooperation and support with other unionist parties, even ones wrong on almost every other policy. Same applies to indy parties in places like Catalonia.
When voting locally, nationally (Scotland or UK) people just might not be able to vote tactically, as is their right, but at some point if a unionist really is a unionist they will be standing shoulder to shoulder with a hated opponent even with no positive action on their part.
Sorry but no there is a getting away from that. You can very easily support the union but care about other principles more. There is no reason why support for the union must gazzump every other priority.
There is a reason why the official Brexit campaign ostracised Farage during the referendum. They knew many people, myself included, would be much less likely to vote to Leave in a campaign fronted by him.
But.....apparently these figures are not weighted by voter turnout (why?) and will be updated later this week....
Can I just clarify, the Panelbase poll in the Sunday Times does use voter turnout which is consistent with its previous poll it is the ComRes poll that has dropped weighting voter turnout so isn't consistent with its previous poll.
Older readers may remember we used to call ComRes comedy results.
They'll be vindicated when the comedy result of the next referendum is the Scots voting to stay in the Union.
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
People will do as they wish and prioritise as they wish of course, but theres really no getting away from that if one supports the union then at some level there will be cooperation and support with other unionist parties, even ones wrong on almost every other policy. Same applies to indy parties in places like Catalonia.
When voting locally, nationally (Scotland or UK) people just might not be able to vote tactically, as is their right, but at some point if a unionist really is a unionist they will be standing shoulder to shoulder with a hated opponent even with no positive action on their part.
My wife and I would both vote for the union candidate irrespective of party if we still lived in Scotland ( for Holyrood)
If Fox got 25% of the vote that would be the highest share for a third party candidate in a London Mayoral election and could even get him to the runoff, though Khan would still likely win.
Otherwise some voters will vote Fox in round 1 then for Bailey in the runoff.
If Fox stands for the Assembly he could get in on the list, especially in somewhere like Bexley and Bromley or Havering and Redbridge
Ummm, a third party candidate once won 39% of the vote in a London mayoral election and actually won the election.
Some indies are like third parties, some are like tenth parties.
If Fox got 25% of the vote that would be the highest share for a third party candidate in a London Mayoral election and could even get him to the runoff, though Khan would still likely win.
Otherwise some voters will vote Fox in round 1 then for Bailey in the runoff.
If Fox stands for the Assembly he could get in on the list, especially in somewhere like Bexley and Bromley or Havering and Redbridge
Ummm, a third party candidate once won 39% of the vote in a London mayoral election and actually won the election.
Dobson was third in 2000 and got 13%, so 25% would be higher than the official Labour candidate then.
Livingstone came first as an independent and Norris was second.
Khan is going to win, there is no doubt about that.
That's why no serious Tory is even running and they're running Bailey instead. Because they don't have a proper candidate like Boris as they all know they'd be humiliated.
I have long thought @Philip_Thompson was a Russian propoganda machine operated by several Kremlin aparatchiks. We have the comedian of the bunch posting this morning. "Because they don't have a proper candidate like Boris as they all know they'd be humiliated". That's a cracker!
I'm no fan of Boris Johnson, but he clearly has (and, more to the point, had) an appeal with cosmopolitan Londoners which allowed him to win in a generally Labour-leaning city. And it's clearly true, imho, that the Tories struggled to get better candidates than Bailey to run because those people thought they'd lose heavily.
If Fox got 25% of the vote that would be the highest share for a third party candidate in a London Mayoral election and could even get him to the runoff, though Khan would still likely win.
Otherwise some voters will vote Fox in round 1 then for Bailey in the runoff.
If Fox stands for the Assembly he could get in on the list, especially in somewhere like Bexley and Bromley or Havering and Redbridge
Fox won't get 25%. Indeed he won't get 2.5%. He may get 0.25% though.
The reason is that he is a tosser with no electoral base or policies.
Khan is going to win, there is no doubt about that.
That's why no serious Tory is even running and they're running Bailey instead. Because they don't have a proper candidate like Boris as they all know they'd be humiliated.
I have long thought @Philip_Thompson was a Russian propoganda machine operated by several Kremlin aparatchiks. We have the comedian of the bunch posting this morning. "Because they don't have a proper candidate like Boris as they all know they'd be humiliated". That's a cracker!
You think the notion that the twice elected former Mayor of London, referendum winning frontman, landslide election winning Prime Minister, who won his party more votes than even Tony Blair in his heyday achieved is a proper candidate is a trolling joke?
Until you can understand why Boris is a proper candidate your side will continue to deserve to lose General Elections.
Khan is going to win, there is no doubt about that.
That's why no serious Tory is even running and they're running Bailey instead. Because they don't have a proper candidate like Boris as they all know they'd be humiliated.
I have long thought @Philip_Thompson was a Russian propoganda machine operated by several Kremlin aparatchiks. We have the comedian of the bunch posting this morning. "Because they don't have a proper candidate like Boris as they all know they'd be humiliated". That's a cracker!
I'm no fan of Boris Johnson, but he clearly has (and, more to the point, had) an appeal with cosmopolitan Londoners which allowed him to win in a generally Labour-leaning city. And it's clearly true, imho, that the Tories struggled to get better candidates than Bailey to run because those people thought they'd lose heavily.
Yes, but that was when Johnson was pro EU and pro immigration.
He wouldn't be allowed to stand on that platform as a Tory candidate now.
If Fox got 25% of the vote that would be the highest share for a third party candidate in a London Mayoral election and could even get him to the runoff, though Khan would still likely win.
Otherwise some voters will vote Fox in round 1 then for Bailey in the runoff.
If Fox stands for the Assembly he could get in on the list, especially in somewhere like Bexley and Bromley or Havering and Redbridge
Fox won't get 25%. Indeed he won't get 2.5%. He may get 0.25% though.
The reason is that he is a tosser with no electoral base or policies.
25% of Londoners want lockdown ended by the end of this month, 25% think Khan too woke as the figures in TSE's thread header show.
If Fox got 25% of the vote that would be the highest share for a third party candidate in a London Mayoral election and could even get him to the runoff, though Khan would still likely win.
Otherwise some voters will vote Fox in round 1 then for Bailey in the runoff.
If Fox stands for the Assembly he could get in on the list, especially in somewhere like Bexley and Bromley or Havering and Redbridge
Ummm, a third party candidate once won 39% of the vote in a London mayoral election and actually won the election.
Dobson was third in 2000 and got 13%, so 25% would be higher than the official Labour candidate then.
Livingstone came first as an independent and Norris was second.
He was still a third party.
You talked about Fox making the run off. If you're defining parties as their positioning (not what the term means) if he got 25% and second he'd not be a third party by that twisted logic. So no it doesn't work.
New Panelbase poll has further bad news for Sturgeon with the SNP down 5% on the Scottish Parliament constituency vote and down 4% on the list vote and virtually unchanged on the 46.5% and 41% it got in 2016. Both the Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Labour are up 3% each and the Greens are also down.
If true that means the SNP risks no majority at all in May
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
People will do as they wish and prioritise as they wish of course, but theres really no getting away from that if one supports the union then at some level there will be cooperation and support with other unionist parties, even ones wrong on almost every other policy. Same applies to indy parties in places like Catalonia.
When voting locally, nationally (Scotland or UK) people just might not be able to vote tactically, as is their right, but at some point if a unionist really is a unionist they will be standing shoulder to shoulder with a hated opponent even with no positive action on their part.
Sorry but no there is a getting away from that. You can very easily support the union but care about other principles more. There is no reason why support for the union must gazzump every other priority.
There is a reason why the official Brexit campaign ostracised Farage during the referendum. They knew many people, myself included, would be much less likely to vote to Leave in a campaign fronted by him.
That was the point. If someone cannot prioritise the union if it means they are technically working with labour/tory people they can certainly be free to do so, but it is a very low bar.
It wasnt a scenario of who was leading a campaign or on specific issues, it was the basic concept - can I vote the same way as a Tory/labour supporter? If the answer is never, then union support in a referendum impossible so long as those parties are still unionist.
Voting for representatives is different. Some just will never be able to tick the box of their hated opponents no matter what.
But a union is like having a loyal opposition to show opposition to gov but support for the system. You will be on the same side as people you hate vs those who want to tear down the system.
If Fox got 25% of the vote that would be the highest share for a third party candidate in a London Mayoral election and could even get him to the runoff, though Khan would still likely win.
Otherwise some voters will vote Fox in round 1 then for Bailey in the runoff.
If Fox stands for the Assembly he could get in on the list, especially in somewhere like Bexley and Bromley or Havering and Redbridge
Fox won't get 25%. Indeed he won't get 2.5%. He may get 0.25% though.
The reason is that he is a tosser with no electoral base or policies.
25% of Londoners want lockdown ended by the end of this month, 25% think Khan too woke as the figures in TSE's thread header show.
They would be his target base
Yes but that election is not until May, when lockdown will be over.
The only interesting market would be an over/under market for him. I would suggest 1% of first preferences.
This pol and the other one yesterday offer a great opportunity for Unionist parties to fight effectively agsinst the SNP. However, I doubt whether either the LDs or Labour have it in them to play their part of the bargain and vote Tory where they are the challengers. In failing they could well bring the Union down.
Works both ways of course, in many places.
That is my point - the Tories have shown willing at both party and voter level. Not so the other two.
Of course. You have misunderstood the situation. We have it on the authority of HY no less, that the top priority for Conservatives is to defeat the SNP. It follows that Conservatives will vote for Lib Dem or Labour candidates if they have a good chance of defeating an SNP candidate.
On the other hand, most normal Labour and Lib Dem voters strongly dislike the Tories, and even more so under the leadership of the present shower. There is nothing I want to see as much as Conservative candidates defeated. I could even be persuaded to consider voting SNP (were the conditions right), so much do I detest and despise the present government.
Comments
- we're too addicted to welfare spending, supporting uncompetitive industries like farming or failing regions
- huge sections of the economy are monopolies or tight oligopolies
- we've masochistically saddled ourselves with ridiculous environmental obligations
- our construction industry, which affects so much else throughout the economy, is hobbled by some of the tightest planning regulations in the world
and, perhaps above all,
- we have a government which prioritises short term electoral gain over the sometimes paninful reforms needed to tackle the above.
So we'll probably do alright, but not as well as we could.
All the more so if it is the polar opposite of the Holyrood whitewash. It will bring into sharp relief just how much the Scottish Government has become a fawning tool to preserve the position of the First Minister.
Whoever does replace her is going to need to do quite the spring clean.
My dog has more chance of being Mayor of London than Laurence Fox. Presumably Fox, despite his ignorance, knows this. He'll be standing hoping to make money from it, given his acting/'singing' careers have dried up.
The poll shows some support for ending lockdown soon, and large support for ending it by the end of May. Well, I'd like lockdown to end today. We all would. But I don't think it should. I don't think such polling distinguishes enough between what people would like to happen and what people think should happen.
Admittedly that once had lasted for 63 days and counting...
Edit - remember, next week cases are going to spike dramatically if LFTs are any use at all (which they may not be). So that may have an effect on public opinion.
That is why our smarter posters (not me, as I haven’t really commented) have rightly been warning she would stay focussed on hospitalisations and deaths as the metric.
But the Mail, the Beeb and the rest of the gutter press won’t, of course.
One the second point, though, you are right. There's a distinct difference between wanting something to happen and thinking it's desirable now.
In a out-patients waiting area yesterday, and while the tree or four elderly gentlemen there all wanting to get back to normal, that was ASA safely P, not immediately. We all know people who had had Covid, some fatally.
And a lot of people who no longer have a job.
Now you aren't going to win in a budget as people will always complain but a 1% payrise allows everyone to complain.
What should have been offered is either a 1 off thank you bonus or weeks additional holiday.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/07/alex-salmond-scottish-politics-nicola-sturgeon-metoo
That's made my day!
https://twitter.com/hthjones/status/1368491264027529219?s=20
And they wonder why they are so far behind HMG on looking after the economy
"Is this a digger I see before me?"
Having 2.9% inflation and a 3% pay rise is worse not better than having a 1% pay rise and less than 1% inflation, but the 3% sounds more "generous".
Scotland will elect an endless series of Nationalist Governments until independence occurs. The direction of travel is set. It's just a matter of how long it takes to get there.
One doesn't, of course need more than one cataract operation per eye, AFAIK, but this woman, having had one on her right eye was, apparently, going to need one on her left in the not-too-distant.
If I do get a problem in my right eye, the improvement in my left, the one I had done, would ensure I was back to the operating theatre PDQ!
Farage would do better, I am surprised he’s not had a go
You just legislate to change the name of the post, alter rules of succession to be by election and open to all. Done.
Malc has been entirely vindicated on here and it does demonstrate yet again a week is a long time in politics
Maybe a unionist party will emerge that Hoover's up the unionists votes. The BQ lost its way in Quebec.
The best way for that to happen would be for unionism to win a second referendum, like they did in Quebec, which puts the issue to bed in the voters minds.
But it seems some people are petrified of democracy. In which case they deserve to lose.
And E-7 buy reduced to 3 from 5.
No mention of Challenger so that decision must be going down to the wire!
Otherwise some voters will vote Fox in round 1 then for Bailey in the runoff.
If Fox stands for the Assembly he could get in on the list, especially in somewhere like Bexley and Bromley or Havering and Redbridge
40 years ago you'd claim on the same logic that the level of SNP support meant independence was impossible and they should give up Well what do you know, things changed!
I dont think it will, and I think a vote will come too soon for a change, but the idea they will always vote X is ridiculous.
Indeed, as I have maintained for a long time the SNP would love another referendum if it was called
(Amusing typo guessing you meant lose)
If true that means the SNP risks no majority at all in May
https://twitter.com/electpoliticsuk/status/1368372868569042945?s=20
https://twitter.com/ScotTories/status/1368477645034389507?s=20
That's why no serious Tory is even running and they're running Bailey instead. Because they don't have a proper candidate like Boris as they all know they'd be humiliated.
Love it and lose it
When voting locally, nationally (Scotland or UK) people just might not be able to vote tactically, as is their right, but at some point if a unionist really is a unionist they will be standing shoulder to shoulder with a hated opponent even with no positive action on their part.
I do not expect Sturgeon is having a very happy weekend looking at the Scottish newspapers and polls
Older readers may remember we used to call ComRes comedy results.
In politics all things are relative. Nothing is absolute. There are only two horses in the competition, especially in England, which is where Tories win elections. There is no conviction whatsoever that Labour is either more competent, would have done it better, or are a suitable government for post Covid or post Brexit. Tories are ahead (You Gov) in every socio economic group, and doing even better with C2DE than with ABC1- which is a huge culture shift.
Boris is a genius and wins things. Labour has not yet found one to match. Against some absolute standard the Tories are of course awful, it makes no difference. It's only Labour they need to beat.
There is a reason why the official Brexit campaign ostracised Farage during the referendum. They knew many people, myself included, would be much less likely to vote to Leave in a campaign fronted by him.
Livingstone came first as an independent and Norris was second.
The reason is that he is a tosser with no electoral base or policies.
Until you can understand why Boris is a proper candidate your side will continue to deserve to lose General Elections.
He wouldn't be allowed to stand on that platform as a Tory candidate now.
They would be his target base
You talked about Fox making the run off. If you're defining parties as their positioning (not what the term means) if he got 25% and second he'd not be a third party by that twisted logic. So no it doesn't work.
Really who cares?
It wasnt a scenario of who was leading a campaign or on specific issues, it was the basic concept - can I vote the same way as a Tory/labour supporter? If the answer is never, then union support in a referendum impossible so long as those parties are still unionist.
Voting for representatives is different. Some just will never be able to tick the box of their hated opponents no matter what.
But a union is like having a loyal opposition to show opposition to gov but support for the system. You will be on the same side as people you hate vs those who want to tear down the system.
The only interesting market would be an over/under market for him. I would suggest 1% of first preferences.